Dear : 
 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code.  After careful and conscientious consideration of relevant portions of your naval record and your application, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied. 
 
A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 December 2020.  The names and votes of the panel members will be furnished upon request.  Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of the Board.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.  
 
The Board carefully considered your request to remove your 15 May 2019 nonjudicial punishment (NJP).  The Board considered your contentions that you were not fully aware of all the evidence against you in the police report, and once you were able to review it, you noticed multiple discrepancies and incorrect information.  Additionally, statements you made in court were documented in an investigation report without your consent, and was later used to find you guilty at Office Hours.  You also assert that you did not refuse the breathalyzer, but because you were not able to get a blood alcohol content (BAC) reading, it was counted as a refusal.  You also assert that, if you could have had a blood test done, you would have been able to prove my innocence.  You also assert that you were willing to go to court-martial to prove your innocence, but instead accepted NJP.  Lastly, you assert that you have never been in trouble either in the military or with civilian authorities.  
 
The Board determined that your commanding officer relied on a preponderance of the evidence standard in determining your guilt at Office Hours.  Prior to the imposition of NJP, you were given the opportunity to consult military counsel, provided at no expense to you, prior to your decision to accept NJP.  You were also advised of your right to demand trial by court-martial in lieu of NJP, but you did not exercise this right and agreed to accept NJP, subject to appeal, and you did not appeal.  Additionally, the Board noted that there is nothing in your application or your record that substantiates that you requested, but were refused, the evidence that was used against you at NJP.  Moreover, with regard to the investigation, any unwarned statement you may have made would be inadmissible at a court-martial; other uses (nonjudicial, administrative uses) of an unwarned statement are not prohibited.   
 
You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new matters, which will require that you complete and submit a new DD Form 149.  New matters are those not previously presented to or considered by the Board.  In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.  Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. 
 
 Sincerely,